The proposed charter of this working group (and the BoF which has led
to this point) have a limited scope and a limited timeframe. Since the
initial pick list of identities was given, some of the proposals are
leaning toward more grandiose mechanisms than previously proposed.
Please keep in mind that the scope of the work here is to be limited to
problems in the area of MTA authorization and the class of spam that
may be stopped by this type of authorization (i.e. not spam generated
from compromised hosts, ill-meaning senders, etc...).
Therefore, we once again ask the participants of this list to focus on
the following identities:
2821 HELO/EHLO domain
2821 MAIL FROM
2822 From:
2822 Sender:
New structure/RR's in .arpa *
We also ask that participants consider and list the following
ramifications regarding deployment issues:
1) Amount of change in software components (MDA, MTA, MUA, DNS servers,
DNS resolvers).
2) Configuration complexity.
3) Current use cases that will no longer be viable.
4) Needed infrastructure changes.
5) Considerations for use in both IPv4 and IPv6.
regards,
your proposed chairs.
(* Note: existence checks of PTR RRs in the reverse-tree do not require
protocol work.)